General Philosophy

Model - Connection Soul = Server Body = Computer God or Life = Internet Memory - All our memories are hosted on our server, the soul, for it use a connection that unite us to a network, the Internet, all this data traffic is processed by our computer, the body. The body alone can not bear to store all our memories, so there is a natural need to upload the entire contents to the server, so we can access these data when necessary. Forgetting is linked directly to the deterioration of our memory (ability to acquire, store, and retrieve memories), taking into account that our server has unlimited storage capacity, but to access and retrieve that data we need a skilled func…

Time is the number we cannot understand by myself as the number. I can define that it is not illusion, but it is feeling to know someday as the knowledge for together to get it. So we share our own number together as the Time Number.

There are many ways to imagine the world; but scientists imagine the world in line with the scientific method. Are scientists somewhat nihilistic, therefore? And what I mean by this is that the infinite nature of the mind, seems suppressed to a particular standpoint.

I say that physically nothing means a state which is a space(time) energy, matter and information free nothing. I say that the mathematical expression of this state is 0. I suggest that the beginning of our Universe is that state. Everything presented in our common physical reality evolved in proportion to this state. Ever since anything exist this state is impossible. There is just One set and an "infinite" subsets of this set. Zero is a conception. A reference point in our current physical reality. I suggest that lower value than the physical zero state can not exist. Because of this I suggest that it is an ever evolving positive system. …

I would like to see what peoples opinions on religion and science. I was raised for 15 years in a christian house, at which point I was taught to believe the various things that religion has taught me. However after these 15 years i left my home and my church to go serve in the military where my religious beliefs faded and i more looked at the world in a more "logical" manor, this being if you can explain it then its real. since getting out ive thought back on this again and again and have come to the idea that it is no longer science OR religion, but rather science AND religion, in the sense that science is mearly a way for poeple to explain how the "inexplainable", reli…

one single eternal moment that contains inifinite possibilites? could the atom itself represent this? the nucleus standing for the moment and the electron representing the infinite possibilities? anyone?

Axiom 1: A perfect thing is symmetric. Axiom 2: Our universe is not symmetric. Axiom 3: Imperfect things must have a cause Axiom 3a: Further, the cause of an imperfect thing must be different from the thing itself. Axiom 3b: Further, the cause of an imperfect thing must be perfect. Accepting these five axioms gives Theorem: Our universe was caused by some perfect thing (other than itself). One model of these axioms would be: "Symmetric" means having rotational or bilateral symmetry other than the trivial symmetry. "Perfect" means having bilateral symmetry. "Our universe" means the letter "Q". "The cause of X" means the letter "I" for any X. Yes -- under your assumptio…

Over the entire history of the human race even though technology has expanded drastically there humanity has fallen by the wayside. I believe we will eventually go the way of the Dinosaur to extinction. I find this most regrettable. With all our potential to change even the evolution of the universe we choose to take the shortsighted option and live only for immediate personal gain. I would be quite interested in hearing others opinions on this matter. Respectfully, Pat Hagar

Can the enquiring spirit in us be ever quenched? e.g. 1. Suppose, science finds the fundamental particle...next question can be...What mechanism caused this fundamental particle?....or.....How it came about? If someone says, it has been always there...one can ask...What is the mechanism through which something can be eternal? and so on.... 2. Suppose, someone finds God and says that He/She/It exists eternally/necessarily...next question can be...Why only He is a necessarily existing creature and not some other one? or What mechanism leads to necessary existence? and so on.... In a nutshell, can questions ever end? Any thoughts, not necessarily serious …

I’ll hang fire on supplementary details, for now, and wait to see what direction the replies send the thread (assuming it gets any) so please discus.

Brought up here; I'd never heard of this conundrum http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton's_dome http://www.pitt.edu/~jdnorton/Goodies/Dome/ Basically, there is a dome shape and the top is a point of unstable equilibrium. There is a solution where an object at the top can spontaneously move off of the top, and once it does, continues accelerating. This is offered as an example of a violation of determinism, as the motion is purportedly spontaneous. But I have a quibble with (at least) one of the arguments I don't think that creating a new version of the first law means that you can claim this is consistent with Newton's laws. The emphasis on "uniform mo…

I argue that everyone 'should' respect the planet, and thus everyone has a compound respect or faith; one respects his mother because she gave birth to one, and one is brought up by her bosom, at her side. Whether or not you accept this fact, the Earth played a crucial role in your birth; and you grew up by it's side, or at least of it's material. Without editing the universe, Earth is vital to our existence; it's the pursuit of knowledge for self or selves-empowerment that draws us further away, seemingly ability-wise, from the planet, but this is just in thought, it's barely put in practice. Sure we can visit mars but we can expect hundreds of years until we create colo…

I was thinking, as usual and put my finger on something I would like to discuss. The idea of Role Model Capitalism, which is a phrase I just made up until something better comes along. It's the idea that culture at large has changed, from children looking up to their parents, Hereditary Role Model Monarchy, to it becoming socially acceptable at large to rebel from your parents, to believe they are out-of-date and out-of-touch with how things are for the younger generation, and to find social acceptance outside of the home, in whichever social group that happens to fit. This creates a situation of Role Model Capitalism, where different social groups compete against each ot…

Technically, I am. I have a philosophy doctorate. Not seeing where I said that, or even implied it. But in the way we have divided the topics (both here and more or less in academia), "philosophy" is separate from the science sections. Science is derived from and is a subset of philosophy in a historical context but from an organizational standpoint, to me "philosophy" as a discussion topic means "philosophy that's not already categorized as science" (or, to use the historical nomenclature "philosophy that's not natural philosophy" So if you want to discuss F=ma or other laws of nature, your discussion is in some area of science, which has some implications in…

Well I am taking offense. The first casualty of sophistication is integrity -- always. When there is no integrity, there is no truth. No philosopher worth his/her salt would advocate a position of sophistry. Gee

min 13.8 billion. On the level of information which have evolved to my current appearance. And to yours. There is no same as you in the entire Universe. The physical circumstances and the individual interactions in proportion to the whole system can not be changed. Our current physical moment of now is individual. Humanities big question is that what happens with the information after the separation from the biological appearance. Do we belong to the physical system? Of course. You evolved here as I did. The physical age of mine is 13.8 billion years. As yours too.

Question: how can 1 and 1 make 2 when 1 and 1 make 1? I have proof that 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and 5 and 6 and 7 and so on ad infinitum are all the same number. The proof is everywhere. It's a simple case of common sense. 1 and 2 are only different numbers relative to one observer. To someone half my size they are 3 and 4. This can't be denied. That's why it is proved. The universe in a nut shell. So how do 1 and 1 make 1? How do 2 and 2 make 1?

OMG, we've been spammed ! Can someone please clean up and take out the garbage. ( and maybe ban the jackass responsible for it ) Maybe we should be like Dr. Sheldon Cooper. If someone wants to join our 'group', they need to be able to answer a few science questions ( 5th grade level ) or pass an aptitude test.

Does alternate reality have alternate truth? Do all our laws and theories and ideas belong to one reality alone? Does this therefore make truth and law relative? Is the principia relative? Is relativity relative? It is more profound to ask a question to which there is no answer than to give correct answers to thousands of questions. In this reality alone is there no answer to a particular question. Is there an alternate reality? One truth is that we might never know. Knowledge which has no end and no beginning is absolute. But even this is one truth alone To know much about two truths is a greater achievement than to know everything about one

This opinion and it is an opinion is that in travelling 20 miles and returning along the same route instead of having travelled 40 miles you have travelled 20. If you were to travel there and return and travel there again and return you have still only travelled 20 miles. This is because the distance is 20 miles. If you were to use a different route but returned still to the start of the journey, 20 miles is still the distance covered. You can only travel more than twenty if you keep travelling without returning. To travel 20 miles and one step is a further distance than travelling 20 miles and returning.

You claim my post had no "definition of point" Please elaborate.

Imatfaal (selfadmitted) layer. If you want to debate then I am here.

Every physical entity present a certain level of information. Information exist beyond the observable physical reality (metaphysical values as consciousness, intelligence, knowledge, personality etc) Does/should physical descriptions count with the presence of information? Can/should we count information as physical entity?

I am actually really annoyed I haven't seen this come up in the public political debate. Scientists have successfully removed a blastocyst, about 200 cell embryo, cryogenically frozen it, for 20 years, and successfully implanted it into a surrogate and a healthy baby was born. Why couldn't politicians just settle the debate and make it so that doctors, as they usually do, attempt to preserve life. The doctors, instead of destroying the embryo during the abortion procedure, would attempt to preserve it. There are already embryo adoption agencies opening up. While we are beating around this bush, I think we need more gender equality around this subject. The mother-…

A Hegelian Dialectic is when you take two opposite and seemingly contradictory things and combine them to create something new, the thesis, the anti-thesis and the synthesis. I am attempting to come up with a compromise between Moral Universalism and Moral Relativism. While oversimplified, I will define each. Moral Universalism, people believe in a logically consistent morality, a morality that is intuitive, that transcends the subjectivity of culture. They believe right is right and wrong is wrong no matter where you live or what culture you were brought up in. While there is overlap, I believe most modern supporters of Moral Universalism believe all victimless acts shou…